ive shared Jesus with many people. i totally understand the confusion people have with the many different religions and not knowing which one is right. i am very understanding of this, so i just tell people that if they dont know which one to follow, just ask. i meet them half way and tell them to pray and seek God. whoever answers you is God. there are many that people claim to be God but i know that the one true God will answer one way or another. it may take some time for you to wake up and hear him but if you keep seeking, i know he will answer, so i just tell people to pray to the one above. if a person doesnt know who or what to believe and they are sincere about knowing i simply tell them to seek. i know my God well enough to know that he loves us dearly and wants us to know him. yes He is a jealous God but wouldnt you be jealous if the one you loved so much turned away from you and gave their heart to someone else. i know i would.

i dont like to speak on things that i dont fully understand so i just want you to know that the point im about to make is my opinion and not the word of God. i think that God is particular about us following just one way (straight and narrow) because he knows how tricky and crafty the devil is. the devil will make something that is wrong look right. he will set a path that seems to be right but will lead you away from God in the end. God actually speaks on this concept in the bible. "there is a way that seems right but the end leads to destruction". this is actually scripture and not my words. lol, i tried to give my opinion but scripture always comes out. i guess Gods word is just knitted in me man. anyway, the point im trying to make is that there is only one way (Jesus) and every other way no matter how good, nice, or close to the truth it may seem is from the devil.

Well, in that case then Cerridwen must be God for me because she's the one who's been answering my prayers lately. And I wasn't even praying to her specifically. She's just the one who answered.

You can choose whom ever you wish to worship as God. That is your choice. The rewards will be of the same, you worship Cerridwen as God, then your rewards will come from only Cerridwen. You worship our father as God then your rewards will come from only our father. So choose as you wish, that is your choice.

Amen

Why do you say that?

That's utterly ridiculous and absurd.

What are your grounds for saying such a thing?

Because YOUR GOD is a jealous God?

Just because you worship a selfish jerk doesn't make all Gods selfish jerks.

Why is that utterly ridiculous? Is it really utterly ridiculous that you will be rewarded by the God you wish to worship? If I worship a plastic bag, then the blessings from that plastic bag is all I can receive, is it not? For why would the paper bag bless me if I'm worshipping the plastic bag?

About Adultery and Fornication

Jesus spoke of divorce with the Pharisees, for more information about this engagement check out:
Matthew 19:1-15

Marriage is for life:

According to the bible, there is little doubt that marriage was meant to last until death. (Matthew 19:6 – Genesis 2:24)

One of the commandments that Moses brought down from Mt. Sinai was "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery". Obviously this commandment was a reinforcement measure to assure that people who got married stayed married and faithful.



So serious an offense is adultery that it was worthy of having one of the 10 commandments address it.

How DIVORCE come into the picture:

It seems the concept of divorce came through Moses NOT THROUGH GOD. It is Jesus who provides that information during the engagement with the Pharisees



Perhaps there was a lot of adultery going on or maybe a lot of accusations calling for the ultimate punishment, which was death by stoning. Could be that trying to decided between ‘he said/she said’ was getting out of hand OR maybe Moses realized something else - that only God knows the heart.



And so says Matthew



No matter his reasoning, Moses put into effect – Divorce.
The point is that Divorce was never condoned by God and Jesus made that clear.

Fornication or Adultery?



The verse Matthew 19:9 has been called into question because it seems to offer a legitimate reason for divorce – something called ‘fornication’, but there seems to be only one thing that can separate the married couple – death.

There is a difference between adultery and fornication which is evidenced through several bible verses, a few listed here.



Adultery is important enough to warrant a commandment and even when the offence of adultery is committed, divorce is not an option, which might be the reason adulterers were supposed to be stoned to death – because only through death can either partner be free of their commitment to the other.

Both adultery and fornication have the sex act in common, the difference is that only a married person can commit adultery. The joining of two in marriage before God was not just a commitment that joined the two in flesh, it also joined the two spiritually with God.

With that information it becomes clear why a married couple can never divorce and why adultery is so offensive to God as to warrant being one of the commandments.

On the other hand, fornication is a sex act involving a single person, one who is not married, including those who have been married but widowed.

Although the bible still considers sex outside of marriage an offence, it does contain the spiritual elements of marriage.

Now about the quote of Matthew 19:9 in which fornication is thought to be sufficient cause for divorce, there is the question of how that could even be possible – because fornication is an act of a single person. However, there could be some confusion as to how the quote is interpreted.

Consider the bible passages below


Note, that the man who could not prove his claim must remain married all of his days, but if the man proves his claim, he is NOT granted a divorce, he doesn’t need one because the penalty for the woman’s deceit is death and thus the man will be single again.

ALSO, note that she did not commit adultery because the fornication preceded the marriage bed – it was merely the fact that it occurred at all which gave the husband the right to have her stoned to death and get out of the marriage. (Women of course had no such options as there is no conclusive way to determine if a man is a virgin)

CONCLUSION:
According to many places in the bible, beginning in Genesis and through the testimony of Jesus' words, divorce was never acceptable to God, so those who divorce today are not really divorced so any sexual acts would be adultery on the part of the (non-divorced, still married) person.

Of course the individual could always CHOOSE a life of complete abstinence, BUT that won’t help much if lustful thoughts seep in – because God knows the heart and even the thought is an act of adultery for a married person.

In effect, (according to the information presented here ) nearly every Christian divorcee is an unrepentant sinner.

But don't forget a lot Christians believe that abstinance is just another lifestyle, many of them suggest it often enough to the SINGLE fornicators for whom marriage is not an option.



Oh - edited to add -- this post includes part of the reason for confusion when it come to free will and salvation, because we all the freedom to choose our interpretations of any data, especially religious documents, and because of that it makes little sence to assume that IF there is a particular path to eternal bliss, using any religion is a hit or miss proposition.

I think it's best to build a foundations of human values without any exclusions and then to act in accordance with the values you have adopted. And even to alter them from time to time, becasue life is about expereincing and learning and growing.

Only the Abrahamic religions with their jealous God teach that kind of bigotry.

It's truly a shame that you can't understand a genuinely loving God that isn't plagued with the human frailty of jealousy.

That's a very negative trait right there. How did your God ever become so emotionally insecure like that? Did this have something to do with his angels turning against him?

I sincerely hope he finds a way to get past this crippling emotional illness and learns to love freely again someday.

Send him my most sincere regards and tell him I hope he gets well soon.

But don't forget a lot Christians believe that abstinance is just another lifestyle, many of them suggest it often enough to the SINGLE fornicators for whom marriage is not an option.






No there is no such thing as a "divorce".

Mark 10:7-9

7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

We are made in image of our father. With this you can see he would have the same emotions as we do. We are of our father, with this you can see we would have the same emotions as he. It is ok to anger, it's a problem when it turns to a sin. Emotions are just emotions they are all fine and dandy, they are acceptable in every way. It's the actions that proceed the emotions that become the problem and or sin. Anger but sin not as it's said.

So if there's an emotion you feel at at least one point in your life, you can safely say our father has felt the same at one point or other.

The key words, to me, in the quote above are “The purpose is to guide”. Perhaps LAW is too strong a word. I think commitment to the guiding principles might be a better perspective.

There are many fine stories contained in any religious scripture, but when writing no longer equates to current situations, people derive morals from these stories which are more in tune with current day values.

If it’s really all about the morals and the faith, then scripture is good because it can be flexible – it’s the rigid LAW without adequate situation or definitive relativity to current values that seem to create the greatest problem.



Many people do, that’s why it’s so popular, but the nature of religion, of any kind, does not lend itself to strong political structure – we have seen that throughout history. Beliefs are personal and should bring peace and comfort to individuals, not stress and hate or animosity because others won’t conform.



I was specifically addressing the fundamentalism that occurs in the some areas of religious thought. It can be difficult to approach that kind of thinking logically.



I have had some wonderful experiences interacting with various religious communities and I feel I have benefited in many ways from those experiences. I have also witnessed some of the most outrageous acts perpetrated on others through religious propaganda.



Personally, I enjoy being free of any religious commitment. Having that freedom allows me to utilize concepts from any religion, philosophy, person or situation in order to develop my own code of ethics.

In this way I am totally free to make adjustments in my system of values as I gain knowledge through experiences. I am not hindered in my ethical or moral growth by any particular doctrine and I don’t have to worry about complying with directives or commands that don’t work for me.

I’m not worried about life after death instead, my focus is on bringing change for the better, in me, for those around me, and for the future of those I will never know.

Anyway – sometimes the greatest values of an idea are contained in its overall structure. Guidelines are good and those that stand the test of time have an embedded quality of flexibility because everything around us changes and if we can’t change with it we can’t be open to new experiences and that restricts our growth and our potential.

I've actually been in that position, and I can tell you from experience that one sometimes gets horrible advice from someone one trusts as an expert.

Trouble is, *I* was the one that bore the brunt of their incorrect 'choices'. That doesn't mean that there was any malice or subterfuge involved-- they had the best of intentions, they just didn't have all the facts or the modern technology to reach a more informed diagnosis/prognosis.

And for some maladies, placebos work just fine. No harm, no foul. But to tout, for example, some like aspirin as being the cure for everything is a mistake, too. Because of my personal biochemistry, NSAIDS like plain old aspirin could conceivably set up a chain of events that could kill me.

But I'm not preaching against the evils of aspirin on that basis-- I'm just saying nothing works for everyone.

-Kerry O.

quite ironic, that text declares that anything human, that serve a "god" for any reward for "itself", shall recieve hell and hades, lol...

and also declare that these worship the false "god" satan, lol...

whom but loved to tout how itself had superior knowledge of revelation and "scriptures" of god, lol...

lol...

why, the text itself declare this "satan", to but run around but spewing scriptures, having memorized all the one's that prove ITSELF as GOOD, but forgetting ALL THE ONE'S THAT PROVE ITSELF LIKE SATAN, LOL...

lmfao...

quite funny, how these, in the very same book used to declare SELF AS SUPERIOR IN REVELATION, are the very one's demanded to depart from "god"...

for indeed, these but pieced together words once written, to prove to themself and all other's how "itself" was more knowing, more worthy, more in tune with god, and correctly believing, to recieve REWARD FOR "ITSELF"...

the greatest miracle on earth, seems to be more how such foul motive run amock, in speakers that declare "themself" as "speakers" of the "divine god", cannot see such in "themself"...

guess there is too much self worshipping of "self", as the "seeking of reward for self" doth create, to even care to notice.

a rather foul stench of self attainment and self greed, portrayed as as "divine god"...

what a demonic joke...

a joke that has cursed a many in human civilization, to become blind to ITSELF, and then "blind" to how it's foul interpertation's for ITSELF, hath spawned the killing and torture of a many of their own fellow man...

quite the belief of the love of their neighbor...

quite ironic indeed.

hell, even in their own book, the "MOST WICKED", were declared to stand upon the hilltops and declare "ITSELF" MOST LIKE GOD, lol...

for indeed, to declare the "belief" of SELF, as the ONE OF GOD, cannot be done, lest one as well deem itself as MOST THINKING AND ACTING LIKE GOD, lol...

oh, but then there be not one iota of a doubt, that MOST ALL THE RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD, WERE CREATED TO SERVE THE SELF SERVING, TO TRY TO GET """REWARD FOR SELF"""...

atrocious, as it blatantly hath NOTHING TO DO WITH LOVING OTHER'S.

and such be alive in the root motive of most all religions on plantet earth...

seems to be why the book declare ALL religion as the creation coming from the twisted satanic demonic human mind itself, that WISH GOOD FOR ITSELF, SO BAD, that it can come to believe that god wish for others to be destroyed, and these "FOLLOWERS", must do it for "him"...

and we wonder why terrorism is alive...

it's not hard to see what in any belief would first create SUCH MENTALITY THRU MOTIVE IN THE HUMAN MIND.

now little boy, you get to go to "heaven", if ye "serve me"...

now, go and kill a few of those damn wicked, for they are the stain on humanity, that deserve not to live, nor heaven, lol...

such only ever created by these self serving that define all outside words ever written into "HOW CAN I PROUCRE GOOD FOR """MYSELF"""...

lol...

and so, the mind becomes mentally ill, but reading into everything read as WHAT COULD CREATE BAD FOR MYSELF.

and, so these, try to DO THE OPPOSITE, TO GET "GOOD FOR SELF".

gullible little goats...

this mentality goes so fart, as to think, that what does not THINK AS ITSELF, OR SEEK REWARD AS SELF DOES, that these "god" should or shall murder and destroy them...

behold, hitler come down and posed as god.

only for the followers that pick a belief to GET GOOD FOR "SELF".

no doubt, the book was the curse, that created the BEAST in humans, or brought out the WORST in humans, those LOOKING FOR ETERNAL REWARD FOR """ITSELF"""...

can't wait to hear their screams and cries for murder, for those that stomp on the book, and spit upon it, and burn it, lol...

perhaps then they will realize, they valued the BOOK, because they VALUED """THEMSELF""" THE MOST.

oh my oh my, aren't "I" just special, that seek reward for "myself"...

lol...

perhaps the book shall strip them naked, and make them eat grass of the field as a beast, for seven years, as the book declared was done to one called neb, whom but sought for greatness and reward for HIMSELF, so as to cure these of their insufferable satanic illusion of themself as "oracles" and speakers for "GODS" TRUTH
lol...

oh, but why oh why, did these NOT assimilate all the foul things of the book as "FOR THEMSELF", and only take unto "themself" all THE """GOOD FOR SELF""" EVER WRITTEN...

such the blind will do.

oh how the self seeker doth blind itself with many words, in it's greedy haste to clutch prmoises of good for "itself".

lol...

lol...

lol...

l...
o..
l.
.

and the grim reaper comes forth and devoures these with eternal fire, leaving neither root nor stuble, for indeed, the day of reaping be a grim one for any such motive that any mortal reckoned within itself to be of "god".

I wrote the following reply in another thread but it applies here as as well - so I'm reposting it here.

Here's the thing - when people adopt 'LAWS' that enforce obedience they may or may not be represented in an individuals personal set of values.

This is why civil law is so often disobeyed, because no civil law will ever represent the true values of all people who live under its control.

The fact that there is 'LAW' within any religious view means that there is enforcement (as in forced) adherence to that law. Enforcement of the law means that some kind of retribution is required by those who break the law.

Most Christian views include a punishment for breaking the law or not adhering to it, which would seem to be far worse than any individual punishment that civil societies enforce today.

So once the belief system has been adopted there is a set of ‘laws’ that dictate the behavior of its adherents. OF COURSE not all those laws will be followed – they simply don’t align with individually held values.

Not even a god that people believe in, can dictate the values that people should hold.

I don’t think it’s really all that difficult to understand that concept, so it really becomes difficult to think a god could not.

That’s why I think that freedom to choose a religious perspective means freedom to define personal values without fear of retribution from the source of its inspiration.

I so thoroughly agree with your thoughts here Di,

Especially the part I highlighted in bold blue.

I certainly fully understand the concept you are addressing here, so why should I think that a being of infinite wisdom could not understand it?

So many people seem to want to reduce God to their level of understanding.

In fact, I already brought up the prefect example I think.

We are suppose to be the children of God. So the analogy is always given of a Father and his Child.

Well, if your child went out and chose the most beautiful picture they could find (i.e. chose a religion that they feel represents a truly wise and beautiful vision of a God), and the child ran over to you (their parent), and said, "Daddy look, I found a picture of you!"

What kind of a parent would be offended by that?

It doesn't take a genius to recognize that such a scenario would be the most beautiful thing a parent could ever hope to see in a child. They Child is looking up to the parent as the most beautiful they can imagine.

So what's the parent going to do? Scream obscenities at the child and cast the child into a place of eternal damnation?

Gimmie a break!

Only a sick demented fool would do such a thing.

This is why the God the Christians have created cannot be real.

You simply can't have a God condemning his children for thinking that he's FAR BETTER than the fables of a sick male-chauvinistic society that has God casting everyone who doesn't belief in their fables into hell.

It's just totally absurd and not even worthy of consideration by anyone who believes that God is even remotely wise or reasonable.

It's crystal clear that the Abrahamic religious myths are man-made dogma to try to keep the masses in line via first a promise of a great reward, and if that doesn't work, then comes the threat of total condemnation and rejection from God for all of eternity.

That kind of mentality can only come from men. It cannot have come from an all-wise being because it simply doesn't reflect wisdom. Period.

there can exist no human interpretation of any law of "god", of human behaviour, and there exist at the same time any "divinely given"......FREE WILL.

such interpretations defined to enforce such, are but taken to assure any human itself be correct in it's own self tainted motive to control other's to mimic ITSELF, and it's OWN PERSONAL BELIEF.

such notion would indeed also violate any premise within the book in question, of "most truth" being OF NO PERSONAL INTERPETATION.

in other words, for it to be "most truth", of some DIVINE, it would have to be agreed upon FIRST, BY ALL "CHILDREN OF GOD" EQUALLY...

for there to exist NO "PERSONAL" INTERPRETATION.

such nefarious notions of a "law of human behaviour" from "god", would also diometrically oppose ALL being declared """FREE MORAL AGENTS""", IN THE SAME BOOK...

indeed, sadly what hath inferior feelings will natrually always but want to use outside written words TO TRY TO DEFINE OTHER'S AS "SINFUL", so self can 'comfort itself', in it's own feelings of inadequency before it's "own" god...

Imagine “REALLY” hard that god is not a physical being and then strip the god model of all human attributes and characteristics. Really boil it all down, and what remains?

Are the moral values of religious views of any less quality? Are the guiding principles of the entire universe any different?

Does god require any emotion at all, in order to remain a concept through which ethical guidance can be attained?

Why does a relationship with something that lay outside the physical realm, and thus outside our comprehension, have to be based on emotion at all?

Why not appeal to logic – imagine a bible that explained something more useful – something basic and instuctive that all humans and societies could benefit from.

Imagine the concept of ‘god’ developing as a strictly unemotional set of guiding principles that deal with our relationships to each other as we interact with out environment.

The ten commandments of ethical interaction with our environment
1. Thou shalt not overpopulate – warning: human population can
exceed environmental capacity
2. Thou shalt find ways to co-habit and not take over - Avoid
destruction of lush vegetative areas
3. Share always what nature provides – consort with each for
peaceful solutions when provisions are short
4. Thou shalt not encumber or corrupt water, its sources, or its
pathways – it is a limited supply

Imagine the great moral implications of an unemotional god model.

Imagine a world in which this religion was the major religion. With these tidbits of knowledge together with human curiosity, how much more advanced would be. Imagine the role an unemotional and more rational set of principles might play on developing human intellect.

Yep – it’s my opinion that people have made a grave mistake in continuing to equate god to humans and humans to god.

I so thoroughly agree with your thoughts here Di,

Especially the part I highlighted in bold blue.

I certainly fully understand the concept you are addressing here, so why should I think that a being of infinite wisdom could not understand it?

So many people seem to want to reduce God to their level of understanding.

In fact, I already brought up the prefect example I think.

We are suppose to be the children of God. So the analogy is always given of a Father and his Child.

Well, if your child went out and chose the most beautiful picture they could find (i.e. chose a religion that they feel represents a truly wise and beautiful vision of a God), and the child ran over to you (their parent), and said, "Daddy look, I found a picture of you!"

What kind of a parent would be offended by that?

It doesn't take a genius to recognize that such a scenario would be the most beautiful thing a parent could ever hope to see in a child. They Child is looking up to the parent as the most beautiful they can imagine.

So what's the parent going to do? Scream obscenities at the child and cast the child into a place of eternal damnation?



Assigning any kind of physical characteristics to the concept of god only increases irrational beliefs and behaviors.

Perhaps one of the most irrational outcomes was the conception that man is somehow made in gods image which of course elevated humans to a human version of a godlike status.

But looking at the destruction of the human element on our environment diminishes any perception that humans are king of the jungle.

Truly,

When you put it that way it reveals the Abrahamic religions to truly be all about ME, ME, ME! What's in it for ME?

It's about the petty behavior of individuals and whether or not Santa Claus is going judge them to be naughty or nice and either provide them with great luscious gifts, or a lump of coal.

The religion is entirely about the saving of individual egotistical souls. Nothing else is important in this religion INCLUDING GOOD WORKS!

It's precisely the opposite philosophy from a spiritual philosophy of the Eastern Mystics. For the Eastern Mystics spirituality is all about discarding the ego. For the Abrahamic religions spirituality is entirely focused on "saving" the ego! And what rewards or punishments the ego will be granted based on its own egotistical behavior.

These two religions are at the extreme opposite ends of the spectrum. One is totally absorbed with ME, ME, ME, and the other is an attempt to recognize and acknowledge the wholeness and oneness of everything. One religion is entirely obsessed with the fate of the "self" and the other spiritual philosophy worships "God" as the essence of everything that exists and does so in the moment, every moment.